On 5/21/24 07:25, Nitesh Shetty wrote:
On 20/05/24 03:42PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On 5/20/24 03:20, Nitesh Shetty wrote:
+ if (max_copy_bytes & (queue_logical_block_size(q) - 1))
+ return -EINVAL;
Wouldn't it be more user-friendly if this check would be left out? Does any code
depend on max_copy_bytes being a multiple of the logical block size?
In block layer, we use max_copy_bytes to split larger copy into
device supported copy size.
Simple copy spec requires length to be logical block size aligned.
Hence this check.
Will blkdev_copy_sanity_check() reject invalid copy requests even if this
check is left out?
Thanks,
Bart.
